IES PRACTICE GUIDE WHAT WORKS CLEARINGHOUSE

Assisting Students Struggling with

Mathematics: Response to Intervention
(RtI) for Elementary and Middle Schools

NCEE 2009-4060
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
 INTRODUCTION

Table 1. Institute of Education Sciences levels of evidence for practice guides

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as strong requires both
studies with high internal validity (i.e., studies whose designs can support causal conclusions)
and studies with high external validity (i.e., studies that in total include enough of the range
of participants and settings on which the recommendation is focused to support the conclu-
sion that the results can be generalized to those participants and settings). Strong evidence
for this practice guide is operationalized as:
r
A systematic review of research that generally meets the standards of the What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC) (see http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/) and supports the effectiveness of
Strong a program, practice, or approach with no contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR
r
Several well-designed, randomized controlled trials or well-designed quasi-experiments
that generally meet the standards of WWC and support the effectiveness of a program,
practice, or approach, with no contradictory evidence of similar quality; OR
r
One large, well-designed, randomized controlled, multisite trial that meets WWC standards
and supports the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach, with no contradictory
evidence of similar quality; OR
r
For assessments, evidence of reliability and validity that meets the Standards for Educa-
tional and Psychological Testing.a
In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as moderate requires stud-
ies with high internal validity but moderate external validity, or studies with high external
validity but moderate internal validity. In other words, moderate evidence is derived from
studies that support strong causal conclusions but when generalization is uncertain, or stud-
ies that support the generality of a relationship but when the causality is uncertain. Moderate
evidence for this practice guide is operationalized as:
r
Experiments or quasi-experiments generally meeting the standards of WWC and sup-
porting the effectiveness of a program, practice, or approach with small sample sizes
and/or other conditions of implementation or analysis that limit generalizability and
no contrary evidence; OR
Moderate r
Comparison group studies that do not demonstrate equivalence of groups at pre-
test and therefore do not meet the standards of WWC but that (a) consistently show
enhanced outcomes for participants experiencing a particular program, practice, or
approach and (b) have no major flaws related to internal validity other than lack of
demonstrated equivalence at pretest (e.g., only one teacher or one class per condition,
unequal amounts of instructional time, highly biased outcome measures); OR
r
Correlational research with strong statistical controls for selection bias and for dis-
cerning influence of endogenous factors and no contrary evidence; OR
r
For assessments, evidence of reliability that meets the Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testingb but with evidence of validity from samples not adequately rep-
resentative of the population on which the recommendation is focused.

In general, characterization of the evidence for a recommendation as low means that the
recommendation is based on expert opinion derived from strong findings or theories in
Low related areas and/or expert opinion buttressed by direct evidence that does not rise to
the moderate or strong levels. Low evidence is operationalized as evidence not meeting
the standards for the moderate or high levels.

a. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on
Measurement in Education (1999).
b. Ibid.

(2)
OVERVIEW

Table 2. Recommendations and corresponding levels of evidence

Recommendation Level of evidence

Tier 1

1. Screen all students to identify those at risk for potential mathematics

Moderate
difficulties and provide interventions to students identified as at risk.

Tiers 2 and 3

2. Instructional materials for students receiving interventions should

focus intensely on in-depth treatment of whole numbers in kindergar-
Low
ten through grade 5 and on rational numbers in grades 4 through 8.
These materials should be selected by committee.

3. Instruction during the intervention should be explicit and systematic.

This includes providing models of proficient problem solving, verbal-
Strong
ization of thought processes, guided practice, corrective feedback, and
frequent cumulative review.

4. Interventions should include instruction on solving word problems

Strong
that is based on common underlying structures.

5. Intervention materials should include opportunities for students to

work with visual representations of mathematical ideas and interven-
Moderate
tionists should be proficient in the use of visual representations of
mathematical ideas.

6. Interventions at all grade levels should devote about 10 minutes in each

Moderate
session to building fluent retrieval of basic arithmetic facts.

7. Monitor the progress of students receiving supplemental instruction

Low
and other students who are at risk.

8. Include motivational strategies in tier 2 and tier 3 interventions. Low

Source: Authors’ compilation based on analysis described in text.

(6)
Checklist for carrying out the
recommendations
Recommendation 1. Screen all
students to identify those at risk for
potential mathematics difficulties and
provide interventions to students
identified as at risk.
! As a district or school sets up a screen-
ing system, have a team evaluate potential
screening measures. The team should se-
lect measures that are efficient and reason-
ably reliable and that demonstrate predic-
tive validity. Screening should occur in the
beginning and middle of the year.
! Select screening measures based on
the content they cover, with an emphasis
on critical instructional objectives for each
grade.
! In grades 4 through 8, use screen-
ing data in combination with state testing
results.
! Use the same screening tool across a
district to enable analyzing results across
schools.
Recommendation 2. Instructional
materials for students receiving
interventions should focus intensely
on in-depth treatment of whole
numbers in kindergarten through
grade 5 and on rational numbers in
grades 4 through 8. These materials
should be selected by committee.
! For students in kindergarten through
grade 5, tier 2 and tier 3 interventions
should focus almost exclusively on prop-
erties of whole numbers and operations.
Some older students struggling with
whole numbers and operations would
also benefit from in-depth coverage of
these topics.
! For tier 2 and tier 3 students in grades
4 through 8, interventions should focus on
( 11 )
in-depth coverage of rational numbers as
well as advanced topics in whole number
arithmetic (such as long division).
! Districts should appoint committees,
including experts in mathematics instruc-
tion and mathematicians with knowledge
of elementary and middle school math-
ematics curricula, to ensure that specific
criteria are covered in-depth in the cur-
riculum they adopt.
Recommendation 3. Instruction during
the intervention should be explicit and
systematic. This includes providing
models of proficient problem solving,
verbalization of thought processes,
guided practice, corrective feedback,
and frequent cumulative review.
! Ensure that instructional materials are
systematic and explicit. In particular, they
should include numerous clear models of
easy and difficult problems, with accom-
panying teacher think-alouds.
! Provide students with opportunities
to solve problems in a group and commu-
nicate problem-solving strategies.
! Ensure that instructional materials in-
clude cumulative review in each session.
Recommendation 4. Interventions
should include instruction on solving
word problems that is based on
common underlying structures.
! Teach students about the structure of
various problem types, how to categorize
problems based on structure, and how to
determine appropriate solutions for each
problem type.
! Teach students to recognize the com-
mon underlying structure between famil-
iar and unfamiliar problems and to transfer
known solution methods from familiar to
unfamiliar problems.
CHECKLIST FOR CARRYING OUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 5. Intervention
materials should include opportunities
for students to work with visual
representations of mathematical
ideas and interventionists should
be proficient in the use of visual
representations of mathematical ideas.
! Use visual representations such as
number lines, arrays, and strip diagrams.
! If visuals are not sufficient for develop-
ing accurate abstract thought and answers,
use concrete manipulatives first. Although
this can also be done with students in upper
elementary and middle school grades, use
of manipulatives with older students should
be expeditious because the goal is to move
toward understanding of—and facility
with—visual representations, and finally, to
the abstract.
Recommendation 6. Interventions at
all grade levels should devote about
10 minutes in each session to building
fluent retrieval of basic arithmetic facts.
! Provide about 10 minutes per ses-
sion of instruction to build quick retrieval
of basic arithmetic facts. Consider using
technology, flash cards, and other materi-
als for extensive practice to facilitate au-
tomatic retrieval.
! For students in kindergarten through
grade 2, explicitly teach strategies for ef-
ficient counting to improve the retrieval of
mathematics facts.
( 12 )
! Teach students in grades 2 through
8 how to use their knowledge of proper-
ties, such as commutative, associative,
and distributive law, to derive facts in
their heads.
Recommendation 7. Monitor the
progress of students receiving
supplemental instruction and other
students who are at risk.
! Monitor the progress of tier 2, tier 3,
and borderline tier 1 students at least once
a month using grade-appropriate general
outcome measures.
! Use curriculum-embedded assess-
ments in interventions to determine
whether students are learning from the
intervention. These measures can be used
as often as every day or as infrequently as
once every other week.
! Use progress monitoring data to re-
group students when necessary.
Recommendation 8. Include
motivational strategies in tier 2 and
tier 3 interventions.
! Reinforce or praise students for their
effort and for attending to and being en-
gaged in the lesson.
! Consider rewarding student accom-
plishments.
! Allow students to chart their progress
and to set goals for improvement.